Jump to content

Superior alternative to finite durability mechanic.


Volkier
 Share

Recommended Posts

So I'll start off with re-iterating what I've already mentioned in another thread - having "finite" Durability mechanic has been universally hated by gamers since the mid-90's, and is the worst possible step backwards for this game that I can imagine, that will:
- Turn off a large chunk of playerbase
- Make replacing destroyed elements hours long endavour due to "element already blocked by another element" error forcing you to strip half your ship before replacing the one thing in order
- Create an insane gap between large orgs and small orgs / solo players

- Make everything in the game less fun - from building, to general flying, to PvP

- Is a survival mechanic that people have repeatedly stated they did not want over the entirety of the development of Dual Universe. Both in forums, discord, private groups etc.

 

The only rational and viable reason I can see why durability would be introduced, is to provide a supply sink and increase demand for new elements, so as the economy does not collapse due to playerbase saturating itself with everything they need to build. (I do have to interject that there will always be players leaving the game, there will always be new players joining the game, there will always be existing players building and creating bigger and more things, the market is showing no signs of being unhealthy, there is absolutely no reason to.... ok /rant off, just had to get that off my chest)

 

Now rather than whining about it without offering solutions, here is a win-win alternative that would not require any massive amount of rework or alterations to the current gameplay that should NOT ONLY  appease both the people who want durability (I'm assuming for the following reason) and those who would rather run a cheese grater over their knees every time they wake up than see it ruin the game we are all passionate about - but also make the game more fun as a standalone mechanic, allow for easy balancing at a later stage, AND open up an entire new playstyle and career prospect in DU. 

So Anyway:

Problem: Economy saturation requiring completed element sink
 

Proposed solution: 
- Keep scrap and element repair functioning exactly the same as it is.

- Scrap will no longer be produced directly from raw ore. Scrap by ore will be replaced by scrap by tier (eg. iron scrap replaced with T1 scrap. Gold scrap replaced with T4 scra.)
- Introduce a "reclaimer" industry element (or add a recycler mode - the first just seems easier). 
- "Reclaimer" industry only has a "start" and "stop" switch. None of the whole industry of run maintain etc. That just seems to be more work and more difficult for the devs. Unless they want to use that system - in which case that would work just as well (we would just need more than one reclaimer for multiple elements)
- "Reclaimer" industry will yeet any fully assembled element from the [linked input] container - such as engines, fuel tanks, windows etc. - and process them back into a fraction of raw materials and a bit of each type of scrap
- The quantity and tier of scrap produced would depend on the quantity and tier of raw materials that were used to make the element in the first place. This means the game has already pre-balanced this system, as small components like lights that require T2 or T3 resources would yield less scrap but of higher tier, large components such as engines would yield a lot of scrap but at tier 1. Yeeting something like a warp drive on the other hand would give back a bunch of low - high tier components and low - high tier scrap. 
 

This also opens up the possibility to add new skill trees, as well as balancing the whole system by simply changing how much of raw materials are returned, how much is turned into scrap, and how much 'disappears' due to efficiency loss. Further, allowing the placement of this industry on dynamic cores, would open up entire career as scavaging ships that are designed to nom on other ships that have been captured or found derelict in space - as well as the dynamic gameplay whereby running out of scrap in the middle of space would require the pilot to make decisions of what components (if any) they can afford to recycle on the spot.

Overall you get:
- Economy sink for completed elements (which basically solves the problem that 'durability' is supposed to fix)
- Incentive for people to look for derelict ships - or create derelict ships from other people when it comes to PvP

- More engaging gameplay when it comes to repairing in the middle of combat

- Expands the salvaging profession into scavenging, as well as creating a salvaging sub-profession

- Creates the possibility of another class of ships being built that follow large org' fleets to "clean up" after a fight

- Creates options for new skill trees

- Allows for easy re-balancing tweaks at a later stage without drastically changing the system

- Is still new player and solo player friendly as there are always elements to recycle (considering you start off with a bunch of stuff)
- Uses existing already implemented and tested mechanics of linking containers and industry.
- Overall win-win for everyone as it expands gameplay and makes it more fun - UNLIKE durability which does the opposite for both accounts (yes I had to say it again).

Alternatively, if someone else has any ideas, that would be good too. Basically at this point, anything would be better than proposed durability changes. I'll go as far as to say that completely removing player markets and player driven economy would be better than proposed durability changes. Ok maybe not, but you get the picture. 

EDIT:
Also alternatively - a simple RNG for a % for an element to get perma-destroyed when your core goes boom - would still be a superior mechanic that creates whatever element sink and necessity the current system does with practically none of the disadvantages listed above. Hell, if there's a minimum % of elements destroyed mechanic - even if it's as low as 1% - would encourage people to actually put decorative elements and whatnot on their ships. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EDIT: I didn't know that there would be a replace element option so im fine with either or

 

100% agree with this. I think rather than wasting hundreds, if not, thousands of people's time with replacing parts that would of taken hours to place at the exact angles and positions they wanted. Like hell it took me two hours to angle and position one window the angle and position ONE window in TWO HOURS.
Its fair that people don't want the economy to fall but In reality that's not going to happen. there will always be a demand for parts. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that this will clearly not please everyone ^^ '

However, it is important to remember that this is not a game in creative mode, solo / co-op with a lifespan of 50 hours.

Currently, far too many things are simple, and the complexity is .... no it's not the right word .... accessibility, that's better ^^ '
The accessibility is too high, everyone can do everything so easily, no need for other players directly or in direct, little cooperative effort ... etc

In short, people find it hard to see the game as an MMO whose goal is to build a new civilization at the moment, and an infinite one to take, manage, create its role in this world.

 

Anyway, why am I saying that ??! Well because without wanting to criticize, even if I know that a lot of people will fall on me ... well the players want everything to be simple, accessible ... etc to play quietly in their corner and do everything so easily . And that goes through the elements, the industry, the management of the damages ... etc

 

 

 

Anyway, after this intro, basically, I'm clearly positive about adding a final destruction! It is clearly a necessity! (and contrary to what we hear, many games have definitive destruction, because it is a need to have an economy that runs, even on management games ... etc. everything is CONSUMED it comes back to the same) .

 

BUT ! I am not necessarily in favor of this system of life, even if I REMIND IT, IT IS A FIRST ITERATION, THEREFORE TEMPORARY and INTENDED to change.

 

This is why I am much more in favor:

  •  1 single life for all the elements (a destroyed element should not logically reshape by wonder)
  •  much more HP for the elements
  •  a degree of performance directly linked to the HP of the element ( fuel consumption, t50, thrust, tracking speed ...etc)

What's the idea, before I get spit on me ^^ ', the idea is to make the complete destruction less frequent, but still impactful. Some examples to explain:

  •  In PVP, we could have a lot less elements destroyed but a lot of damaged. This will keep value to recover in combat, while allowing to weaken a target.
  •  For ship crashes, well some elements yes would be completely destroyed, and IT MAKES LOGIC if you spit yourself out, but a good part would be damaged, even sometimes close to destruction.
  •  This will avoid having second-hand pieces lying around for nothing because they have X lives on Y ... etc

 

Obviously, the idea will greatly benefit from a recycling system to create the scraps, from destroyed elements, since the DESTROYED elements SHOULD NOT DISAPPEAR BY MAGIC ^^ '

 

 

 

There you go, now you can spit on me because I have circumscribed the players who want everything simple and easy and without fuss ^^ '

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Elias Villd said:

I agree that this will clearly not please everyone ^^ '

However, it is important to remember that this is not a game in creative mode, solo / co-op with a lifespan of 50 hours.

Currently, far too many things are simple, and the complexity is .... no it's not the right word .... accessibility, that's better ^^ '
The accessibility is too high, everyone can do everything so easily, no need for other players directly or in direct, little cooperative effort ... etc

In short, people find it hard to see the game as an MMO whose goal is to build a new civilization at the moment, and an infinite one to take, manage, create its role in this world.

 

Anyway, why am I saying that ??! Well because without wanting to criticize, even if I know that a lot of people will fall on me ... well the players want everything to be simple, accessible ... etc to play quietly in their corner and do everything so easily . And that goes through the elements, the industry, the management of the damages ... etc

 

 

 

Anyway, after this intro, basically, I'm clearly positive about adding a final destruction! It is clearly a necessity! (and contrary to what we hear, many games have definitive destruction, because it is a need to have an economy that runs, even on management games ... etc. everything is CONSUMED it comes back to the same) .

 

BUT ! I am not necessarily in favor of this system of life, even if I REMIND IT, IT IS A FIRST ITERATION, THEREFORE TEMPORARY and INTENDED to change.

 

This is why I am much more in favor:

  •  1 single life for all the elements (a destroyed element should not logically reshape by wonder)
  •  much more HP for the elements
  •  a degree of performance directly linked to the HP of the element ( fuel consumption, t50, thrust, tracking speed ...etc)

What's the idea, before I get spit on me ^^ ', the idea is to make the complete destruction less frequent, but still impactful. Some examples to explain:

  •  In PVP, we could have a lot less elements destroyed but a lot of damaged. This will keep value to recover in combat, while allowing to weaken a target.
  •  For ship crashes, well some elements yes would be completely destroyed, and IT MAKES LOGIC if you spit yourself out, but a good part would be damaged, even sometimes close to destruction.
  •  This will avoid having second-hand pieces lying around for nothing because they have X lives on Y ... etc

 

Obviously, the idea will greatly benefit from a recycling system to create the scraps, from destroyed elements, since the DESTROYED elements SHOULD NOT DISAPPEAR BY MAGIC ^^ '

 

 

 

There you go, now you can spit on me because I have circumscribed the players who want everything simple and easy and without fuss ^^ '

That would be even worse. In PVP, during a Fight, your elements will blow up. Multiple times. And you will need people to run around and do repairs, on bigger ships. You cannot bring an entire second version of your ship into combat, just to replace Elements that have been destroyed. 1 Life, or 3 as planned by NQ, will make PVP an absolutely unenjoyable Nightmare. If you want Durability so much, give the Elements many more Lifes, so they can actually last an entire Combat Encounter, and be replaced afterwards. And preferably then, be salvaged by the Proposed salvaging Industry by OP.

A single life for Elements would be Nightmarish even outside of PVP. You entered a farout Planet, just burned in the atmosphere and destroyed a few adjustors. Don't have any with you? None beeing sold? Well, too bad, your screwed, go Force Respawn yourself and try to rescue your ship with another one, or spend Hours building up a Industry on that farout planet just to replace a few stupid parts.

 

1 or 3 or comparable low amounts of durability, or even durability at all, is detrimental to PVP, and as it is intended by you and Novaquark way too punishing for players.

Ship crashes, too, are already punishing enough. Your ships Elements are completely wrecked, and you are in danger of losing your ship to someone coming to salvage it.

 

In its current iteration, as described by NQ, it will also INCREASE the amount of trashy useless Elements you have lying around, because they are now useless with less than max durability, couldn't be reused without a element scrapping mechanic, and cant really be sold because nobody wants Elements that are about to be destroyed.

 

Your argument for just more HP for Elements is not a good idea too, since it will just unecessarily drag out fights, waste more ammuntion making PVP even less of an incentive, and bring the HP of Elements to an unreasonable difference in comparison to Voxels. Might as well armor yourself with just Elements then.

 

Either increasing lifes aka durability to much higher, like 20 lifes or more, with automated replacement(not manual), or completely removing it, AND the addition of scrapping elements into parts and scrap (with loss of course) is necessary. The way it is currently is planned, or how you suggest, is a detriment to the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the current system is a little too forgiving, but durability is not the solution. Hence my proposal - it's aiming to try and compromise with as many alternative thoughts and viewpoints as possible, as it creates a sink for elements and components in the market, keeps the current dynamic of repairing elements during combat, makes taking damage a lot more serious and even expands on the gameplay by introducing a new type of playstyle. Basically a win-win for majority of the playerbase involved is far superior than a loss for the vast majority of people who DON'T want durability. 

And I say vast majority because durability has been the single most hated mechanic in every single game I can think of to date (where it was created in a similar design to the proposed one in devblog) from the first time any multiplayer game has attempted to implement it. I'd love to be proven wrong in a poll of sorts - and would welcome NQ to poll their playerbase as to how many people actually support durability vs. how many don't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, i think what NQ intends to do, giving Elements a finite number of "lives" is quite reasonable, they could combine it with "less max HP per lost live" though. In reality, when something stops working, you can nearly always repair it. Even thought it might not work as well as before. But it has its limits and at one point you would have to replace so much, that the costs are higher than just buying/creating a new one. I do, however advocate for the possiblity to turn elements into scrap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, vylqun said:

Honestly, i think what NQ intends to do, giving Elements a finite number of "lives" is quite reasonable, they could combine it with "less max HP per lost live" though. In reality, when something stops working, you can nearly always repair it. Even thought it might not work as well as before. But it has its limits and at one point you would have to replace so much, that the costs are higher than just buying/creating a new one. I do, however advocate for the possiblity to turn elements into scrap.

 

Sure. That's already the case. You would get to the point of where you spent way more on scrap repairing the same thing that broke repeatedly than you would have if you bought a new one. Unless you are referring to the real world where it becomes more expensive to repair something since the parts have gone up in price due to obsolescence - which artificially drives up costs due to lack of production. Transferring this to the game would be NQ releasing T3 engines that cost the same to manufacture 6 months from now, T4 engines another 6 months and so on.

Lastly realism is a welcome dynamic in games when it increases player immersion, thus in turn increasing escapism from reality. It is not a welcome dynamic however, when it makes the game less immersive by implementing the negative aspects of reality people are trying to get away from in their daily lives by playing the game. Not quite relevant to the topic as durability isn't a thing in reality - but there is a reason we don't have to urinate in the game every few hours, don't get a cold, have to have your character sleep else they become sleep deprived and balance a well nutritioned diet to avoid indigestion. There are games that implement these mechanics to an extent - aka. survival games - and where those mechanics can be implemented well enough to work well in the genre. This is not the genre for that however, nor do any of those mechanics ever push themselves to the extreme of full reality for the same reason. Realism should always be promoted for the sake of immersion, not reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just somehow doubt, that your suggestion would lead to ppl buying new elements to produce scrap. Its more like scrap producer would just build the whole industry and thus the problem, that no new elements are sold wouldn't be alleviated. If we want a solution for that we need something that makes a majority of players to buy new elements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is very difficult to make suggestions for mechanics/systems in a game like DU where not all the systems are implemented yet and future systems details are not available. Each system affects all others like cogs in a machine, some directly, some indirectly through a series of other cogs. Set one cog out of alignment, or have one cog spin a little too fast, it could turn  the entire machine into glazing inferno of death.

So making suggestions through the little pinhole of understanding is the best we can do.

 

That said, permanent element destruction is coming, like it or not. Durability is already in the game in the form of hit points for each element. The real change is once the last “life” has run out, the element becomes irreparable. It means that while it has more than 1 “life” the system is still as forgiving as it was before: repair it and all is well. Eventually the part will be so worn out most wont want to risk flying around with 1 life remaining and risk being stranded after a mishap.

 

I suggest a capstone talent for the repair line of talents. This will make mechanics a wanted commodity. A talent to add a single life to an element that has only 1 life remaining. That is all. 1 life becomes 2. The tiers of the talent could correspond to the tiers of elements to be given the last leg. Make it useable only once per day per element (and potentially increasing cost each time) and players have the option to decide when it’s time to get a new one or continually take it to the mechanic to be repaired. This is forgiving for the casual player while those that want the best and shiniest 5 life elements will replace their elements far earlier. 

 

The little old old lady that flies her spaceship to the market once a week was never going to be the a massive source of income for element sellers. Don’t punish the little old ladies afternoon they crash their ship a little.

 

Think of the little old ladies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/27/2020 at 9:51 PM, decom70 said:

That would be even worse. In PVP, during a Fight, your elements will blow up. Multiple times. And you will need people to run around and do repairs, on bigger ships. You cannot bring an entire second version of your ship into combat, just to replace Elements that have been destroyed. 1 Life, or 3 as planned by NQ, will make PVP an absolutely unenjoyable Nightmare. If you want Durability so much, give the Elements many more Lifes, so they can actually last an entire Combat Encounter, and be replaced afterwards. And preferably then, be salvaged by the Proposed salvaging Industry by OP.

 

 

They will last the entire combat encounter since once they are destroyed thats the combat encounter over, enemy has same limitations and it would discourage solid armored cubes since only enough armor to survive the expected life time of the outer elements would be neccessary.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Alternatively - a simple RNG for a % for an element to get perma-destroyed when your core goes boom - would still be a superior mechanic that creates whatever element sink and necessity the current system does with practically none of the disadvantages listed above. Hell, if there's a minimum % of elements destroyed mechanic - even if it's as low as 1% - would encourage people to actually put decorative elements and whatnot on their ships. And it would actually make salvaging / pvp-ing / flying fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just make repairs eat scrap and durability pts. Eventually the element won't be worth anything at all.

X% hp removes repaired removes Y% Durability from Element. Eventually you will have patched it so many times that the durability is no longer worth it. Then keep a calculation of HP/DUR to reclaimed Resources/parts. You could even save the data as dynamic like they already do.

I agree on scrap unification btw, just make it the same output for "Basic/Adv/Rare/Exotic"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...